Potential People

Potential people have moral worth. Their lives should be allowed to exist.

Practically, those who exist carry more weight. Some of the reasons for this are end's based, as it is the strength of our current social systems and the ethics which influence them which determines which potential people will come into being. Some of these are practical, recognition of the fact that practical ethics must depart from ideals in order to be workable. (LINK TO "YOU SHOULDN'T BELIEVE WHAT IS GOOD IS GOOD./GOOD IS SUBOPTIMALITY")

The is an explanation for the problem of evil. If a god does exist, it would make all potential people exist. Some potential people are evil or only come about as a result of evil.

Alternate explanation: Evil is not real. It's mocked/stubbed. i.e: When I see a child suffering, it's actually just a facsimile without conscious internal processes.

A prophet cannot be a leader

Leadership requires compromise. Truth cannot.

The process of writing

1. Have an idea
2. Write something stupid
3. Rework into something less stupid
4. Repeat 3 ad nauseam

Most of us aren't democrats.

My father always told me that a persons true character reveals itself in adversity. I think this is true. I think it is also true that how a person acts when they have the ability to act as they wish shows who they truly are. Normally, our behaviour is shaped by the norms and expectations of the societies we find ourselves in. Hence, our behaviour does not say so much about us as it does about our circumstances. When we have power, when we can act more or less as we wish, is when our true values shine through.

Democracy and Liberalism more generally means respecting the rights of others, even if they are weaker than you. It means affording the same rights to everyone, rather than giving less rights to the out-group. It means, both as a consequence of these two principles and as a cause of them, that people are allowed to make their own decisions on how to live and what to believe rather than being dictated to by a minority which feels it knows best.

Fascism is the opposite. In fascism, we are right and those who are wrong are less than us and should be swept away. In fascism, the minority (usually but not always synonymous with the weak) can and indeed should be silenced lest they corrupt the minds of others. In fascism, we can use coercion to force people to believe what we deem is right, weather that coercion is overt and violent or subtle and social.

The more I observe the behaviour of people when they are given power, the more I believe that even in the west today, most of us are fascists and are only waiting for the opportunity to put our beliefs into practice. I don't mean that most people are Nazis or support genocide. I do mean that most of us do not subscribe to the basic norms of liberty and non-coercion enough to qualify as democrats.

Most people would not hire someone with political beliefs they found wrong. The CEO of Mozilla was pressured out of his job (https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2014/04/mozillas-gay-marriage-litmus-test-violates-liberal-values/360156/). Many believe that boycotts are an acceptable form of pressure. Taken together, these constitute economic strangulation of those with beliefs that fall outside the norm.